

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

David Vance, (202) 7365712, dvance@commoncause.org
More than 60,000 Americans registered their opposition to the proposed T-Mobile/Sprint merger in a new petition submitted to the FCC on Tuesday by Common Cause, Free Press, Communications Workers of America, Demand Progress Education Fund, and other public interest groups.
Over the last several months, consumer groups, tech watchdogs, labor unions, racial-justice advocates, and others have spoken out against the deal. In addition, dozens of members of Congress and several candidates for president have registered their opposition to the deal.
If approved, the merger would leave the United States with only three nationwide wireless service providers. Despite claims made by T-Mobile and Sprint executives the deal would reduce competition, raise prices and result in the loss of as many as 30,000 jobs. It won't advance their stated goal of faster 5G deployment and improved rural broadband service. In addition, the deal would be harmful to low-income consumers and communities of color.
T-Mobile and Sprint customers are far more likely to be people of color than are AT&T's and Verizon's. Fifty-six percent of T-Mobile's subscribers in 2018 identified as people of color, as did 45 percent of Sprint's. Sprint and T-Mobile (and their prepaid brands Boost, Virgin and Metro) are the dominant providers of mobile service for low-income people. More than 30 percent of Metro and Boost subscribers report yearly incomes of $25,000 or less.
Groups gathering petition signatures include Common Cause, American Family Voices, Center for Media Justice, Communications Workers of America, Daily Kos, Demand Progress Education Fund, Fight for the Future, Free Press, The Nation and more.
"Our democracy depends on all Americans having access to robust and affordable wireless voice and broadband services in order to fully participate in 21st-century society," said Yosef Getachew, director of Media and Democracy Program at Common Cause. "Unfortunately, a merger between T-Mobile and Sprint would only lead to fewer choices, higher prices, and widen the digital divide. Low-income Americans and other marginalized communities who disproportionately rely on T-Mobile and Sprint for more affordable services may also find themselves displaced from wireless access if this merger is approved. Thousands of Americans have spoken out to tell the FCC there are no benefits to the public interest in a marketplace where Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are allowed to call all of the shots. The FCC must listen to these concerns and block this merger."
"With this proposed merger T-Mobile and Sprint have turned their backs on the very customers that made these companies profitable: those in low-income communities and people of color," said Nilda Muhr, campaign manager for Free Press. "Don't believe a thing these company executives say about the benefits of this mega-merger. Combining two competitors means less competition, and less competition means higher prices for those who can least afford the costs of staying connected. Widening the digital divide is never in the public interest. That's why the FCC must listen to the tens of thousands of Americans speaking out against this deal and reject the T-Mobile/Sprint merger immediately."
"A merger between Sprint and T-Mobile will be good for no one but Sprint and T-Mobile shareholders and executives," said Robert Cruickshank, campaign director at Demand Progress Education Fund. "Three national companies with roughly the same market share have no incentive to compete head-to-head. The result will be less choice, worse wireless plans, and higher prices for customers - especially those with lower incomes."
"This merger means fewer jobs and lower wages," said Debbie Goldman, research and policy director for CWA. "CWA's analysis shows that 30,000 people will lose their jobs as the new T-Mobile closes redundant corporate-owned and authorized dealer stores. The labor market will be flooded with unemployed retail wireless workers seeking jobs, and average annual earnings for those workers still employed will decline by as much as $3,000. Job loss and reduced wages are not in the public interest - it's clear that the FCC should block this merger."
"T-Mobile doesn't have us covered," said Erin Shields, national field organizer for Internet Rights at the Center for Media Justice. "Though people of color make up a majority of their customers, this merger with Sprint pulls the rug out from under our communities. Reduced competition will likely mean higher costs for those on lower incomes and force many to choose between feeding their families and keeping them connected. The FCC must step in and block this merger to avoid further exacerbating the digital divide and leaving our communities even more disconnected than they already are."
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200"Republican politicians who cut healthcare to pay for more billionaire tax cuts, or to increase profits for their corporate donors, are selling out working families," said Rep. Greg Casar.
The enhanced subsidies for people who buy their health insurance through exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act have officially expired, and Democratic lawmakers are ready to make sure voters know whom to blame going into the midterm elections.
Politico reported Friday that while Democrats in Congress are still pushing their Republican colleagues to allow a vote on renewing the enhanced subsidies, they have mostly settled on a political strategy of going scorched-earth on the GOP for letting them expire in the first place.
Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.) told Politico that Americans who see their monthly premiums skyrocket in the wake of the subsidies' expiration will take out their anger on the GOP.
"I think the public’s angry," Bera said. "So I think they will blame the party in charge."
Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) emphasized that the huge spikes Americans will see in their monthly premiums will help Democrats make the case that President Donald Trump and Republicans have failed to tackle the affordability crisis in the US.
“It’s part of the top issue, which is cost of living—whether it’s groceries, gas, housing, energy costs,” said Deluzio. “Healthcare seems to be top of mind as something that Congress can actually do to bring down the costs."
In a Friday social media post, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) also piled on and hammered the GOP for inaction on healthcare.
"Healthcare is a human right, not a bargaining chip," he wrote. "Republican politicians who cut healthcare to pay for more billionaire tax cuts, or to increase profits for their corporate donors, are selling out working families."
And its not just Democrats raising alarms about the expired subsidies, as Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) said in an interview with BBC that was "pissed for the American people" about his party not holding a vote on renewing them.
"Everybody has a responsibility to serve their district, to their constituents," said Lawler. "You know what is funny? Three-quarters of people on Obamacare are in states Donald Trump won."
One journalist called it "absolutely insane Nazi propaganda, posted by the US government."
The Trump administration provoked horror this week with the suggestion that the United States could be turned into a paradise if over a quarter of the people in the country were deported.
On Wednesday, the official social media account for the Department of Homeland Security posted a piece of artwork depicting a pink late-1960s Cadillac Eldorado parked on a bright, idyllic beach. Over the clear blue sky are the words "America after 100 million deportations."
The post was captioned by the agency: "The peace of a nation no longer besieged by the third world."
Social media users later discovered that DHS had, ironically, stolen the image from the Japanese pop artist Hiroshi Nagai without giving credit.
It is hardly the first time the administration has used edgy and inflammatory social media posts to promote its agenda. But DHS has come under particular scrutiny for its style of communication, which often overtly evokes white nationalist rhetoric and symbolism.
Posts by the agency have cheered "remigration," a term that far-right parties in Europe have often used to describe the forced repatriation of nonwhite populations, including citizens. Other posts have referred to President Donald Trump's "mass deportation" campaign as part of an effort to defend American "heritage" and "culture."
The agency frequently evokes images of the American frontier and references "Manifest Destiny," at times explicitly posting artwork glorifying the forced displacement of Native American populations.
An image by the agency, featuring a chiseled Uncle Sam calling on Americans to "REPORT ALL FOREIGN INVADERS," was even directly sourced from an overt neo-Nazi account.
The agency has only continued to double down in the face of criticism this week. On Friday, it posted that "2026 will be the year of American Supremacy" over an image of then-Gen. George Washington crossing the Delaware River, which was emblazoned with the words "Return this Land," a possible reference to a recently-founded "whites-only" town in rural Arkansas known as "Return to the Land."
But Wednesday's post calling for "100 million deportations" specifically was perhaps the most overt nod yet to those who believe the United States must be reconstituted as a white nation. As social media users were quick to point out, only about 47 million people living in America are foreign-born, according to the US Census Bureau.
Even if the administration kicked out every single immigrant—including legal residents and naturalized citizens—meeting such a goal would mean deporting 53 million people who were born in the US and are legally entitled to citizenship under the 14th Amendment.
If the use of the phrase "third world" did not make it obvious enough, the specific number—100 million—seems to betray the racial motivation behind the message.
Citing 2020 census data on the Wikipedia page for "Demographics of the United States," one social media user pointed out that approximately 100 million people in the US identified as nonwhite.
The DHS post drew comparisons to one made earlier this year by the close Trump ally and unofficial White House operative Laura Loomer, who suggested that thanks to "Alligator Alcatraz," the massive internment camp in Florida for those arrested by immigration agents, "the alligators are guaranteed at least 65 million meals," which referenced the total number of Hispanic people in the United States.
While it's almost certainly not possible for the administration to conduct a deportation campaign of such a staggering scale within Trump's term of office, the administration's latest post was frightening to many observers, even as they acknowledged that it was a "troll post" meant to rile people up.
It is still reflective of the Trump administration's ideology with respect to immigration. Leaders of Trump's deportation effort have acknowledged that they target people based on their appearance, and many nonwhite US citizens have been caught in the dragnet. Meanwhile, its refugee policy has welcomed only white South Africans, as Trump has enacted what he says is a "permanent pause on migration from all Third World Countries."
During 2026, the administration has said it plans to target hundreds of US citizens each month for "denaturalization," and Trump has called for it to be used against his most prominent critics, including the Somali-American Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and New York's first Muslim mayor, Zohran Mamdani.
"This is absolutely insane Nazi propaganda, posted by the US government," said Ben Norton, editor of the Geopolitical Economy Report of DHS's call for "100 million deportations."
"It makes it clear that the Trump administration's mass deportation drive is not actually about 'illegal immigration.' There are estimated to be 14 million undocumented immigrants in the US. But the fascist DHS wants to deport 100 million people," Norton continued. "This is a call by the US regime for ethnic cleansing of racial minorities, to create a white-supremacist regime without anyone with 'third world' heritage."
"Musk is not cloaked in some federal immunity just because he's off-again/on-again buddies with Trump."
Elon Musk is facing calls for legal ramifications after Grok, the AI chatbot used on his X social media platform, produced sexually suggestive images of children.
Politico reported on Friday that the Paris prosecutor's office in France is opening an investigation into X after Grok, following prompts from users, created deepfake photographs of both adult women and underage girls that removed their clothes and replaced them with bikinis.
Politico added that the investigation into X over the images will "bolster" an ongoing investigation launched by French prosecutors last year into Grok's dissemination of Holocaust denial propaganda.
France is not the only government putting pressure on Musk, as TechCrunch reported on Friday that India's information technology ministry has given X 72 hours to restrict users' ability to generate content deemed "obscene, pornographic, vulgar, indecent, sexually explicit, pedophilic, or otherwise prohibited under law."
Failure to comply with this order, the ministry warned, could lead to the government ending X's legal immunity from being sued over user-generated content.
In an interview with Indian cable news network CNBC TV18, cybersecurity expert Ritesh Bhatia argued that legal liability for the images generated by Grok should not just lie with the users whose prompts generated them, but with the creators of the chatbot itself.
"When a platform like Grok even allows such prompts to be executed, the responsibility squarely lies with the intermediary," said Bhatia. "Technology is not neutral when it follows harmful commands. If a system can be instructed to violate dignity, the failure is not human behavior alone—it is design, governance, and ethical neglect. Creators of Grok need to take immediate action."
Corey Rayburn Yung, a professor at the University of Kansas School of Law, argued on Bluesky that it was "unprecedented" for a digital platform to give "users a tool to actively create" child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
"There are no other instances of a major company affirmatively facilitating the production of child pornography," Yung emphasized. "Treating this as the inevitable result of generative AI and social media is a harrowing mistake."
Andy Craig, a fellow at the Institute for Humane Studies, said that US states should use their powers to investigate X over Grok's generation of CSAM, given that it is unlikely the federal government under President Donald Trump will do so.
"Every state has its equivalent laws about this stuff," Craig explained. "Musk is not cloaked in some federal immunity just because he's off-again/on-again buddies with Trump."
Grok first gained the ability to generate sexual content this past summer when Musk introduced a new "spicy mode" for the chatbot that was immediately used to generate deepfake nude photos of celebrities.
Weeks before this, Grok began calling itself "MechaHitler" after Musk ordered his team to make tweaks to the chatbot to make it more "politically incorrect."